TMA vs. MMA

Discussion on the three big Chinese internals, Yiquan, Bajiquan, Piguazhang and other similar styles.

TMA vs. MMA

Postby CaliG on Sun May 25, 2008 2:25 pm

Got your attention. But this isn't just another BTDT thread. The thing I want to talk about is what makes a good fighter. Doing one martial art or cross training in different martial arts?

I believe the traditional way of doing one main art well (for a number of years) and then supplementing that with other training methods (or even a secondary style) is the ideal way to go. Not that it's important to just do one thing again and again and again (and nothing else) as much as it's important to do that one thing a thousand times before you move onto another thing (and drop the old one).

I think one problem that can happen with martial arts scene of the future is that with the popularity of MMA everyone is going to want to do some kickboxing, some BJJ, some wrestling, some boxing, etc.. but without taking one of those arts to the "end" by doing one technique a thousand times. (In my mind each of those arts is a traditional art in that they each have their ritualized ways of training that is unique to the art and goes back centuries, I'm not using the defintion of a TMA as non-combat sports.)

I believe this will eventually carry into other styles. If you have one school which for example is going to teach you some true hardcore gongfu where you just focus on kicking and punching for the next 5 years and then down the street you have a MMA school which is telling you that they'll teach you everything you need to know about kicking, punching, takedowns, throws, groundfighting and submissions in 5 years where are most people going to go to? Which one do you think is better in the long run? And will the gongfu school to stay in business if it doesn't adjust to popular demand?

My personal opinion is that that the best fighters (both inside and outside the ring) have a mastery of one main art but are open-minded about their training methods and how they apply their art to different situations, the question is will the average martial artists of the future grasp this or will the next generation be a generation of dabblers?
Last edited by CaliG on Sun May 25, 2008 3:02 pm, edited 4 times in total.
CaliG

 

Re: TMA vs. MMA

Postby DeusTrismegistus on Sun May 25, 2008 2:56 pm

Majority Dabblers. Its a trend that has already started. Few people my age (lower 20s) spend a lot of time on any one thing, except maybe video games. There will always be exceptions and I think TMA that focus on one thing will still be desired. Not everyone wants to learn about throwing or submissions, not everyone wants to learn punching or kicking. Some people will be drawn to TMA because of the people involved or the feel of a place. Eclectic teachers may turn off people who thrive on a focused curriculum. Sure some schools will jump on the bandwagon and try to teach everything, many already are.
I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a

bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle. -- Winston Churchill
User avatar
DeusTrismegistus
Wuji
 
Posts: 3702
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 5:55 am

Re: TMA vs. MMA

Postby bruce on Sun May 25, 2008 3:44 pm

in my opinion it is important to have a foundation in some form of fighting and after you have that i think you can and should train a few different types of arts. while you are getting your foundation it may be important to spar/push with people outside of your style.

if you only do one art and you do not train/exchange with people outside of your style you may be surprised when your skills are tested by a stranger.

there is a fine line between "jack of all trades" and "one dimensional"
User avatar
bruce
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1413
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:21 am
Location: atlanta, ga

Re: TMA vs. MMA

Postby jafc on Sun May 25, 2008 3:53 pm

I think that fighting is something most of us did in their twenties & early thirties. Now that I am nearing forty - I don't do a lot of fighting. So sticking to one art works well for me now. I can still fight. I can still train. I work on depth of knowledge, precision, strategies for my art. I've learned some weapons. It's great for my health. Blah, Blah, blah. At the end of the day, I do it because I love it &, in some ways, it defines who I am. Older guys will likely carry on TMA.

Dabbling was never my thing but I understand why people do it. If you want to fight in the MMA ring, you have 2 choices.

Choice one start training early - by early I mean 9,10,11 years old - in whatever style you (or more likely your parents) like. Stick with it until your out of high school or college. Now with a decade or so of a solid foundation you can branch out & cross-train. Guys who do this seem to do very well in MMA - look at all the all american wrestlers getting into the sport. In fact, one of the ultimate fighter guys flat out admitted he didnt have anywhere to go after wrestling in college so he took up MMA. I think this makes the best fighters but it requires a little forethought & planning.

Choice two (for those who started late)- join a well-rounded MMA gym. If you are starting this stuff in your early 20's, you cant spend a decade just learning one thing. By the time you've done that & then added other styles to cover weak spots, you're too old. So for these guys, something well rounded is the way to go.

Can traditional martial arts produce good fighters, absolutely. In the current venue, most of them have gone the "choice one" route. And what do those guys do when they have gotten their fill of fighting, some teach their traditional style; some teach a hybrid fighting gig. Again, older guys carrying on the tradition.

This is pretty much for sport fighting. Wanna be a killer? The elite military units of most countries excel & taking reasonably driven, athletic guys & turning them into bad ass soliders. It is the shortest, quickest & most reliable to get there. It is probably the only place where '"reality based martial arts" means what it says on the door.

In the end, I think there will always a small group of people who are interested in traditional stuff for its own sake. If you are that guy, I sincerely appreciate you keeping the tradition alive - my kid may be one of the ones interested in what you have to offer. If not mine, someone's kid will be & that is really all matters.

The majority will dabble & give it up when their bodies quit on them.

JC
jafc
Mingjing
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 7:18 am

Re: TMA vs. MMA

Postby kenneth delves on Sun May 25, 2008 5:38 pm

Got news for you, there has never been a large number of people really going to the limit[becoming a lifer, 20 years or more]Its just that the more conspicuous ones gave that impression. They get girlfriends, get married, make money, get involved in other activities.The popular sport'arts, TKD, Judo, WuShu, Boxing, where people are involved for 5-10 years are supported by a network of competitions, social activities etc. The person with a real passion incorporates it physically, healthily and philosophically into their life fabric. MMA is the latest manifestation.If TMA were that popular sites like EF would have 200,000 members not a few hundred. They do their thing, I do mine. MMA wont help you when you are 70, TMA, if practiced correctly, will.
User avatar
kenneth delves
Great Old One
 
Posts: 115
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:23 pm
Location: BROOKYN, NEW YORK

Re: TMA vs. MMA

Postby JuanM on Sun May 25, 2008 9:18 pm

Meh, nothing wrong for the average Joe to be a dabbler. There's soooo much stuff out there to learn, I myself would love to take BJJ classes (imagine that), boxing, kali, etc. As long as the person who is a dabbler and never finished anything doesn't open his/her own school it's all good. If they are happy doing their thing then by all means go ahead and do it. Sometimes we take ourselves way too seriously. Remember that the largest percent of martial arts practicioners are doing it as a hobby.
JuanM
Great Old One
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 11:57 am

Re: TMA vs. MMA

Postby nready on Sun May 25, 2008 9:55 pm

The closest thing in TCMA that has a style of ground fighting is the monkey. There use to be videos of this 80 year old man still doing the monkey style. So I would say if you want ground you will have to study the ground games, of some type.

The BJJ and MMA have there approach, and TCMA has it own as well. I like the three internals, mainly because I do. That is all I can say! It is like working out some people keep it up for life some don't, I don't know why you just do what build comfort in yourself.
nready
Santi
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 2:53 pm

Re: TMA vs. MMA

Postby shenme on Mon May 26, 2008 8:07 am

Could be me but I do not think MMA or BJJ discovered ground fighting it has been around for a very long time.

But to the point MMA is in my opinion the latest craze. It will be around for a long time like any Martial Art but its popularity will wane. Yes it is bleeding into many TMA and to me that is sad because it changes them to something they are not. And if you do want to combine TMA and MMA nothing wrong with that but if you are training Bagua and combine it with BJJ or MMA and still call it Bagua then that is just wrong IMO. Train it but call it MMA or MMB or what ever you want but it is no longer Bagua.

Take a bunch of CMA styles and slap them together and still call it Changquan or Taijiquan or Xingyiquan is not right IMO but call it Sanda or Sanshou then fine that is what it is.

Also you have some major philosophical differences between MMA and TMA as well. MMA trains to defeat their opponent in the ring. TMA, also IMO, trains to win a fight but for the most part would prefer not to fight at all. Also in TMA there is little or no concern for the other guy in a fight, you have no intension or thoughts of a rematch.
Its not the size of the dog in the fight, its the size of the fight in the dog.


蒂姆
shenme
Mingjing
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:25 am
Location: Top Right-hand corner of US

Re: TMA vs. MMA

Postby MikeC on Mon May 26, 2008 8:20 am

Personally, I think MMA has been the best thing to happen to the martial arts world in a long time. Kind of a wake up call IMHO.

Mike
MikeC

 

Re: TMA vs. MMA

Postby CaliG on Mon May 26, 2008 9:03 am

Yes it is bleeding into many TMA and to me that is sad because it changes them to something they are not.


I think it's okay for someone to know and do more than one style but if they teach I think they should separate them and keep them as they were meant to be for teaching purposes.

On the other hand on the street does it matter what style the technique came from that wins the fight? I suppose not which is probably why people have no problems creating hybrid styles.

The point I'm trying to make isn't actually MMA vs. TMA as much as questioning the influence of MMA on the martial arts community as a whole.

I myself cross train in grappling and I've also added boxing drills to my training routine so I definately see the benefits of studying and doing more than one style but I've also noticed that a lot of TMA schools have jumped on the MMA bandwagon and teach everything under the sun.

As I mentioned before what works works, so I can understand the benefits in terms of self-defense on the other hand I've noticed that some of these schools will go as far as teaching boxing, kali, judo and aikido in one class in which case I can't imagine the student is actually going to retain anything useful.

Obviously people can do and will do what they want to do, this is just something I've noticed has changed in the US in the last few years.
Last edited by CaliG on Mon May 26, 2008 9:11 am, edited 2 times in total.
CaliG

 

Re: TMA vs. MMA

Postby shenme on Mon May 26, 2008 9:39 am

MikeC wrote:Personally, I think MMA has been the best thing to happen to the martial arts world in a long time. Kind of a wake up call IMHO.

Mike


I think it could be/should be but in many cases it isn’t.

Many TMA people resort to the; MMA has rules and TMA has none so TMA is better for fighting and leave it at that and go on fooling themselves that what they train is effective, better, more dangerous, etc. and maybe in some cases it is but not in most IMO. But on the other hand you get into the proof of concept stuff and pressure testing from the MMA camp and you end up in an argument and nothing gets accomplished.

And to clarify my original post about philosophy, I do not mean to say that MMA would not be effective, it most certainly would it is just a difference in philosophy that is all. I do feel that many MMA schools train hard, very hard, as TMA use to and in some, but few cases, still does. But I would rather see many TMA style revert to the hard training they use to do instead of incorporating MMA. But if that is their choice and that is what they want to do more power to them, it just is no longer the original TMA.

Hell if a day was 36 hours long or if I didn't have to work I would go train at the local MMA school too, but it would be MMA and I would not try and combine it with my Taiji and call it taiji or combine it with my (beginner stages) of XIngyiquan and call it XIngyiquan. But I would like to add the few opportunities I have had to talk to real MMA people they all seemed rather interested in the CMA I train or have trained.... an anything that can help them win kind of interest.

CaliG wrote:
Yes it is bleeding into many TMA and to me that is sad because it changes them to something they are not.


I think it's okay for someone to know and do more than one style but if they teach I think they should separate them and keep them as they were meant to be for teaching purposes.

On the other hand on the street does it matter what style the technique came from that wins the fight? I suppose not which is probably why people have no problems creating hybrid styles.

The point I'm trying to make isn't actually MMA vs. TMA as much as questioning the influence of MMA on the martial arts community as a whole.

I myself cross train in grappling and I've also added boxing drills to my training routine so I definately see the benefits of studying and doing more than one style but I've also noticed that a lot of TMA schools have jumped on the MMA bandwagon and teach everything under the sun.

As I mentioned before what works works, so I can understand the benefits in terms of self-defense on the other hand I've noticed that some of these schools will go as far as teaching boxing, kali, judo and aikido in one class in which case I can't imagine the student is actually going to retain anything useful.

Obviously people can do and will do what they want to do, this is just something I've noticed has changed in the US in the last few years.


I agree with you.
Last edited by shenme on Mon May 26, 2008 9:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
Its not the size of the dog in the fight, its the size of the fight in the dog.


蒂姆
shenme
Mingjing
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:25 am
Location: Top Right-hand corner of US

Re: TMA vs. MMA

Postby ashe on Mon May 26, 2008 12:38 pm

kenneth delves wrote:The popular sport'arts, TKD, Judo, WuShu, Boxing, where people are involved for 5-10 years are supported by a network of competitions, social activities etc.


that's a good point and something i think we could benefit from. (the events/social network)
discipline, concentration & wisdom
----------------------------------------
http://fallingleaveskungfu.com/
Facebook
Instagram
ashe
Great Old One
 
Posts: 3259
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 1:08 pm
Location: phoenix, az

Re: TMA vs. MMA

Postby MikeC on Mon May 26, 2008 4:12 pm

shenme wrote:
MikeC wrote:Personally, I think MMA has been the best thing to happen to the martial arts world in a long time. Kind of a wake up call IMHO.

Mike


I think it could be/should be but in many cases it isn’t.

Many TMA people resort to the; MMA has rules and TMA has none so TMA is better for fighting and leave it at that and go on fooling themselves that what they train is effective, better, more dangerous, etc. and maybe in some cases it is but not in most IMO. But on the other hand you get into the proof of concept stuff and pressure testing from the MMA camp and you end up in an argument and nothing gets accomplished.

And to clarify my original post about philosophy, I do not mean to say that MMA would not be effective, it most certainly would it is just a difference in philosophy that is all. I do feel that many MMA schools train hard, very hard, as TMA use to and in some, but few cases, still does. But I would rather see many TMA style revert to the hard training they use to do instead of incorporating MMA. But if that is their choice and that is what they want to do more power to them, it just is no longer the original TMA.


Well, at least MMA woke up the Tai Chi hippie crowd who never fought and who just did forms all day. As far as there being a Tai Chi camp out there that could compete with the MMA crowd, I have my doubts.
:-\

Hell if a day was 36 hours long or if I didn't have to work I would go train at the local MMA school too, but it would be MMA and I would not try and combine it with my Taiji and call it taiji or combine it with my (beginner stages) of XIngyiquan and call it XIngyiquan. But I would like to add the few opportunities I have had to talk to real MMA people they all seemed rather interested in the CMA I train or have trained.... an anything that can help them win kind of interest.


Why wouldn't you try and combine them? Martial arts is about fighting, not about which style you do...

Mike
MikeC

 

Re: TMA vs. MMA

Postby shenme on Mon May 26, 2008 5:49 pm

MikeC wrote:Why wouldn't you try and combine them? Martial arts is about fighting, not about which style you do...


Because there are not 36 hours in a day and I still have to work :)
Its not the size of the dog in the fight, its the size of the fight in the dog.


蒂姆
shenme
Mingjing
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:25 am
Location: Top Right-hand corner of US

Re: TMA vs. MMA

Postby MikeC on Mon May 26, 2008 8:06 pm

shenme wrote:
MikeC wrote:Why wouldn't you try and combine them? Martial arts is about fighting, not about which style you do...


Because there are not 36 hours in a day and I still have to work :)


Cmon.. ::)
MikeC

 

Next

Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests